usrusr

One workload with observed radio discipline handling secrets, the other workload with a haystack of chatter that's not supposed to know about any of the secrets. When supply chain attack is in scope, trust only ever goes as far as misbehavior is observable. Cooperating workloads could be quite a powerful tool to make misbehavior less observable.

So many good answers here, all converging on moderation overreach stifling the page before LLM came in.

I'm not disagreeing at all, but I'd like to add that the moderation issues did not come from a vacuum: they were a reaction to SO reputation becoming so much of a CV optimisation metric that SO must have felt a lot of pressure to do something. Turns out that something wasn't good, but I'm not sure that other paths taken would have been much less bad. Some success just aren't set up to last.

> On top of that all AI companies seem to be run by megalomaniacs.

Not all of them. Only those who outspend all the others and then you never really hear of any others. It's like the most basic requirement for the job.

Trust isn't exactly a new problem in ai. Guess why the semantic web never had a chance? There's more incentive for fake than for fact.

"Let's repeat the success we had with the flamethrower"

I guess Tesla has officially entered its The Boring Company stage? Ambition does come in unexpected form, occasionally.

Wire character recognition

In the context of the current discussion (minus the part that's accidentally derailing it by focusing too much on other meanings of the term credit), credit card vs debit card is not relevant at all: they are both denominated in currency, so they are currency. This is not a discussion about cash vs electronic.

Currency vs credit, as it was used some posts up is more like quantifiable vs not quantifiable. It's not about the exact catering expenses of parties thrown ("they had champagne, we have to invite them twice!") it's about inviting or not inviting. Not about the number of hours taking over the children, it's about being there when needed.

Technically, this wording also implies that they ensure that there's always ample supply of imperfections so that they can never run out of improvements to be made ;)

And yet I had results perfectly within the range of "good enough" having an ai harness muck about in a work folder in a docker mount on a 9P mapped drive under permanent observation by an intelliJ instance on the Windows side before some buggy Windows update made it occasionally lock up under `npm i` sized filesystem loads. Crazy how far we've come.

Have another bomb in the vicinity that did not fail and there will be absolutely no visible indication at all that something penetrated the ground.

I might be imagining this but I think that I have seen a report about some systematic effort to trace bomb dropping patterns in aerial images of the aftermath to find gaps in the pattern where something did not go off. But no idea how early or late after the war that happened (if it did happen). And those patterns will only show up for smaller bombs dropped in quantity, not for the big ones.

When you are paid to sit on your ass to review as much generated code as you can, or to create as much good code as possible given the constraints of a limited amount of tokens, sure. But when you're on your own clock, the trade-off between latency, token budget and quality shifts considerably. And when it actually is a side project (yeah, many meanings of "serious" will be out, I give you that), mobile is just awesome.

That slow trickle of back and forth that gets our intelligent machines called "toasters" in a way not predicted by Battlestar Galactica at all, that really starts shining on mobile. Hands off on terms of signing off every little detail, hands on in terms of never being too far out of the loop, keeping the unattended steps small.

> and investing in... something.

Reads like aimlessly burning whatever they felt they were able to burn without existential risk on some "also ran" LLM sinkhole.

In other words: nothing to see here, same as everybody else.

One thing is certain: in that world, we would not have to brace for a future where pretty much any form of human labor is at risk of getting replaced by just having the machines oxidize even more carbon and telling those humans to just eat cake if they fail to sell any their skills for bread.

So when exactly has that non-mixed-sex workplace existed? It hasn't, the mixed nature was just buried under ungodly amounts of hierarchy full of gender defaults. With harassment just taken as a given. Partially held in check by, well, good guys who I guess have always existed, and the ones from the dark ages must have been very good given the lack of external checks, but those 20 or whatever percent who weren't must have made life quite miserable for those at the wrong side of the default imbalance. Yes, progress has happened but we should still have more of it, not less. And HR plays a role in this progress, even if at times it appears a little annoying or excessive.

> Will they settle?

Perhaps if OpenAI promises to never ever get involved with the music economy?